Phil Lawler of CatholicCulture.org offers an in-depth analysis of President Obama's accommodation of the religious Left in the flap over his administration's coercion of religious institutions, most obviously Catholic ones.

Catholic Leftist's like Sr. Carol Keehan, D.C., President of the Catholic Health Association--known as Obama's nun; the presumptive Bishop of the American Church recognized by secularists and self-hating Catholics--approve of the State intruding upon the Church's internal governance. They won't object about that until Catholic governance reflects their beliefs, at which time enough will be enough, the lamb will lay down with the lion, and Church-State relations will achieve heights of cooperative tranquility unknown to mankind since the Warsaw Pact.

Rather, the President's offense was that the State had been too overt, too clumsy, too flippant, too obviously tyrannical in pushing its beliefs on those who think differently about sexuality than the President and his fellow travelers. Surprisingly, the Catholic Left chaffed: a group he can ill afford to lose in his continuing quest to reshape America in his image and likeness.

[quote] In a perceptive analysis of the political debate, reporter Laurie Goodstein of the New York Times said that in its decision to amend the original HHS mandate, the Obama administration was never really driven by a desire to mollify Roman Catholic bishops, who were strongly opposed to the plan. She explained:

Rather, the fight was for Sister Carol Keehan--head of an influential Catholic hospital group, who had supported President Obamas health care law--and Catholic allies of the White House seen as the religious left. Sister Keehan had told the White House that the new rule, part of the health care law, went too far.

Now that Sister Keehan has endorsed the Obama compromise (along with Father Larry Snyder of Catholic Charities USA), the Obama administration can claim that many Catholics, including some who had originally opposed the plan, now see the wisdom of his ways. President Obama does not intend to persuade the American bishops to support his proposal; he intends to siphon off support for the bishops among American Catholic voters, driving a political wedge further into the countrys Catholic community. [end quote]

The Catholic Left will happily comply with President Obama's intentions; their intentions are one and the same. The Catholic Left shares more with his Statist beliefs than it does with the magisterium of the Church.

Can it be long before Frances Kissling shakes her pompoms at an ObamaScare rally?

Meanwhile, thoughtful citizens of good will concerned about the government's violation of consciences, and evisceration of constitutional protections, can ponder the following:

[quote] Perhaps fearful of being caught up in partisan politics, the bishops shrink from drawing the obvious conclusion from this revealing episode: that the Obama administration is contemptuous of religious freedom and determined to undermine the authority of the Catholic hierarchy.

President Obama, on the other hand, is not averse to a political battle with the bishops. And if he is willing to risk a direct confrontation with the bishops in this, an election year, one can only imagine how blithely he would ride roughshod over Catholic protests during a second presidential term, when he would not need to worry about re-election! [end quote]

Thankfully, citizens recognize that when the State presumes to define the religious identity and ministry of the Church, it's boot menaces many more throats than the one it steps on. It shouldn't be long before Elie Wiesel chimes in.

["(Jose) Diaz-Balart is the son of Rafael Diaz-Balart y Guitierrez (a former Cuban politician). He has three bothers, Rafael Diaz-Balart (a banker), Mario Diaz-Balart (a US Congressman) and Lincoln Diaz-Balart (also a US Congressman). His aunt, Mirta Diaz-Balart, was Fidel Castro's first wife."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Diaz-Balart]

JOSE DIAZ-BALART, TELEMUNDO NETWORK: "Liberation theology in Nicaragua in the mid-1980's was a pro-Sandinista, pro-Marxist, anti-U.S., anti-Catholic Church movement. That's it. No ifs, ands, or buts. His church apparently supported, in the mid-'80s in Nicaragua, groups that supported the Sandinista dictatorships and that were opposed to the Contras whose reason for being was calling for elections. That's all I know. I was there.

I saw the churches in Nicaragua that he spoke of, and the churches were churches that talked about the need for violent revolution and I remember clearly one of the major churches in Managua where the Jesus Christ on the altar was not Jesus Christ, he was a Sandinista soldier, and the priests talked about the corruption of the West, talked about the need for revolution everywhere, and talked about 'the evil empire' which was the United States of America."

REV. BOB SCHENCK, NATIONAL CLERGY COUNCIL: "it's based in Marxism. At the core of his [Wright's] theology is really an anti-Christian understanding of God, and as part of a long history of individuals who actually advocate using violence in overthrowing those they perceive to be oppressing them, even acts of murder have been defended by followers of liberation theology. That's very, very dangerous."

SCHENCK: "I was actually the only person escorted to Dr. Wright. He asked to see me, and I simply welcomed him to Washington, and then I said Dr. Wright, I want to bring you a warning: your embrace of Marxist liberation theology. It is contrary to the Gospel, and you need, sir, to abandon it. And at that he dropped the handshake and made it clear that he was not in the mood to dialogue on that point."

In March of 2007, FOX News host Sean Hannity had engaged Obamas pastor in a heated interview about his Churchs teachings. For many viewers, the ensuing shouting match was their first exposure to "Black Liberation Theology"...

Like the pro-communist Liberation Theology that swept Central America in the 1980s and was repeatedly condemned by Pope John Paul II, Black Liberation Theology combines warmed-over 1960s vintage Marxism with carefully distorted biblical passages. However, in contrast to traditional Marxism, it emphasizes race rather than class. The Christian notion of "salvation" in the afterlife is superseded by "liberation" on earth, courtesy of the establishment of a socialist utopia.http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=30CD9E14-B0C9-4F8C-A0A6-A896F0F44F02 _______________________________________________________

In the days when the Superpowers were locked in a Cold War, Latin America seethed with revolution, and millions lived behind an iron curtain, a group of theologians concocted a novel idea within the history of Christianity. They proposed to combine the teachings of Jesus with the teachings of Marx as a way of justifying violent revolution to overthrow the economics of capitalism.

The Gospels were re-rendered not as doctrine impacting on the human soul but rather as windows into the historical dialectic of class struggle. These "liberation theologians" saw every biblical criticism of the rich as a mandate to expropriate the expropriating owners of capital, and every expression of compassion for the poor as a call for an uprising by the proletarian class of peasants and workers.http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=460782B7-35CC-4C9E-A2C5-93832067C7CD

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.